Flow Experiences and Image Making: An Online Chat-Room Ethnography
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Flow Experiences and Image
Making: An Online
Chat-Room Ethnography
Aviv Shoham
University of Haifa
ABSTRACT
Chat rooms are a relatively new phenomenon. They provide a unique
experiential locale, much like a community. They have become a pop-
ular replacement for oft-diminishing communities of yore. Qualita-
tively building on three overarching themes, chat rooms are put at
the nexus of three diverse theoretical themes: community, flow expe-
riences, and image management—the latter two being explored in
this article. Chat rooms provide flow-like experiences to participants
and allow chatters to manage and enhance their images. Given that
chatters are highly involved and frequent visitors to their online
community (specific chat rooms), they provide a unique opportunity
to study this relatively new phenomenon, which has far-reaching,
multidisciplinary implications. © 2004 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Internet-based chat rooms have been growing rapidly. Some chatters
come in infrequently but many visit daily and spend hours chatting.
What needs do chat rooms fill? Is it a case of “if you build it, they will
come,” or is it an answer to true consumer desires? What could be the rea-
sons for the ever-increasing popularity of chat rooms? People enter the
magical chat-room doors to bond socially, to look for solutions to personal
problems, or to satisfy a need for affiliation with a community. All of
these motives in combination suggest a community-based meta-motive
for chatting.
Psychology & Marketing, Vol. 21(10): 855–882 (October 2004)
Published online in Wiley InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com)
© 2004 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. DOI: 10.1002/mar.20032
855This community-based meta-motive has not gone unnoticed. Scholars have turned to online communities in a quest for a deeper and thicker understanding of modern-day community members (Kozinets, 1998, 2002; McAlexander, Schouten, & Koenig, 2002; Muniz & O’Guinn, 2001). How- ever, most inquiries have been limited to specific communities (e.g., Harley-Davidson and Jeep owners—McAlexander et al., 2002; Saab, Mac, and Bronco owners—Muniz & O’Guinn, 2001). This ethnographical article extends previous research on Internet communities to chat rooms. A chat room is a non-geographically-bound community, which is based on relationships between chatters. It can be general (e.g., the “lobby” in many chat facilities) or specialized (e.g., by age group); open to the general public or of limited access; and moderated or nonmoderated. Although such communities have been studied as pop- ular forums for brand-interested individuals, chat rooms have become cen- ters for a new, non-brand-centered, Web-based marketplace (Donath, Karahalios, & Virgas, 1999). For example, Internet relay chats (IRC) have blossomed (one central MIRC, a client on the EFNET server, hosted 76,223 chatters in 651 rooms at 11:00 pm on 2/18/2002). In short, chat rooms have become a central feature in the online lives of many people. Studying chat rooms is important to many disciplines. First, chat rooms are provided by Internet service providers (ISP) and portals in many countries, making them a global phenomenon. Thus, understanding chat behavior is managerially important. Second, chat rooms serve as new communities. They provide a suitable context for products and services, which are discussed by chatters with shared interests. This makes chat rooms conducive for word-of-mouth about issues that pique participants’ interests (Locke, Levine, Searls, & Weinberger, 2000). Because chat rooms form around shared interests, they can serve to launch new products and to market existing products. This enhances the interest of manage- ment and marketing scholars in chat rooms. For example, Cornerstone Promotion (2002), a marketing firm specializing in under-the-radar mar- keting, offers a service of digital street marketing, which can be used to “create online street buzz via fan sites, message boards, chats, discus- sion groups, etc.” This firm belongs to what PBS (2001) called “Merchants of Cool”: “The firm hires kids to log into chat rooms and pose as another fan of their clients.” Third, chatters meet face-to-face beyond the chat room they use, making them a nonvirtual community. Thus, their on- and off-line behavior is worthy of study by sociologists. In sum, chat rooms are lively communities that deserve research attention. As this research progressed, it became clear that chat rooms could be studied from three perspectives: community, flow experiences, and image management. Although the community perspective has been addressed to some extent in previous research in a different context (McAlexander et al., 2002; Muniz & O’Guinn, 2001), treating chatting as a manifesta- tion of flow experiences and as an arena for image management and enhancement are unique to this study of online life. 856 SHOHAM
RESEARCH PROGRAM Ethnography and Fieldwork This research followed a qualitative approach, which has a long tradition in the marketing literature. In fact, a special 1999 issue of Psychology & Marketing was devoted to such research. Qualitative research can take on many forms, such as focus groups (Nevid & Sta Maria, 1999), inter- views, observations, and document analyses (Cohen, 1999a), the last three of which were used in this research. A focus on age-based chat rooms (e.g., chat room for people in their 40s) served as the foundation for this pure autoethnographic research. The project began with participant silent observations. That is, the researcher was present in the chat room but did not interact with chat- ters. It is to be noted that although most similar research projects use mul- tiple observers, the current study used a single observer. The approach used to handle the associated problems in this regard is detailed later in this section. The researcher became fully incorporated into the popula- tion of interest over an extended period (McAlexander et al., 2002; Stew- art, 1998). Thus, it involved the researcher in a presence role. In other words, the researcher and chatters experience the phenomenon as if it is not computer mediated. This is similar to Paccagnella’s view (1997) of virtual communities as exemplars of real and meaningful personal rela- tionships (compared to real-life relationships) in the absence of physical matter. Following established guidelines for this type of research (Hirschman, 1986; Kozinets, 2002), the analysis was multiperiod and multilevel. It followed the notions of integrity and system (Cohen, 1999b) by being prolonged, persistent, and triangulated, involving gain of chatters’ trust, and culminating in researcher retrospection (Wallendorf & Belk, 1989). The first level of analysis was conducted after the end of the first phase (2 months), the second after the second phase (2 months), and the third involved a continuous reflection on emerging themes over the third phase of the study (18 months). Self-reflection was used to elaborate on and assess the themes and to direct future observations. The fourth stage involved a deep analysis of notes and printed records and writing of a first draft. Thus, three research tools advocated for a qualitative study (online interviews and observations and document analysis) were used (Hall & Rist, 1999). The research began in April 2000 with the researcher silently observ- ing exchanges in age-based Israeli chat rooms for people in their 40s and 50s. This stage corresponds to the first stage in the humanist method, namely, “a priori conceptualization” (Hirschman, 1986, p. 240). The phe- nomenon was seen as a mass of contents and processes the researcher wanted to study, guided by a strong desire to deeply understand the nature of chat rooms. The researcher was not identified as such in all FLOW EXPERIENCES AND IMAGE MAKING 857
ethnography phases, except to the individuals who were asked to com- ment on the first draft (discussed below). The second stage of a priori conceptualization served as an “exploratory investigation” (Hirschman, 1986, p. 241). It began in June 2000 and involved interactions in public-access rooms, in which the researcher was introduced as a newcomer to chatting and sought guidance and socialization from experienced chatters for 2 months. After these initial periods, the author’s online relationships developed and grew, resulting in familiarity that made it possible to witness processes and relational changes over time. Observations in two chat rooms allowed a triangula- tion of the themes and ensured that the findings were not chat-room specific. During this subphase, an effort was made to comprehend the phenomenon, identify facets of chat interactions, and assess how they are intertwined. The third phase, starting in August 2000 and lasting 18 months, was “personal immersion” (Hirschman, 1986, p. 241). A switch was made from the original chat rooms into another age-based chat room for people in their 40s to test the themes identified in the first two phases in the context of a different ISP. Such chat rooms included specific, age- based chatters, with high traffic and many individuals, which provided detailed and descriptive exchanges, involving multiple interactions (Kozinets, 2002). Close to 1000 h were spent in chat rooms over 2 years. A continuous observations → theme formation → new observations → revised themes process was used, premature closure in the form of final- izing emerging structures was avoided, and an effort was made to account for the fact that the task was a full understanding of the phenomenon. These emphases made it possible to identify the community and image- management chatting themes first, followed by the flow theme. A con- tinuous process of interpretation, a thick description of the phenomenon (Hirschman, 1986), observations, and one-to-one virtual talks with chat- ters were used to clarify and challenge emerging observations. Notes were taken and chat windows were printed for later decoding of themes, resulting in over 100 pages of notes and printouts. A first draft of the article emerged at this stage and was sent to three experienced chatters as a credibility check (Hirschman, 1986). This phase, designed to authenticate and enrich the interpretations, led to some changes. Then, a second draft was sent to three scholars to assess the dependability and confirmability of the findings (Hirschman, 1986). Their comments were used to reformulate and resynthesize the themes, sub- themes, and their interrelatedness. Another draft was then sent to an edi- tor of an academic computer-mediated communications journal. After accounting for his comments, the current version was written. Description Chatters during all phases numbered 500–1000 across portal rooms and 10–100 in specific rooms, peaking in late evening/early night and week- 858 SHOHAM
ends. Notably, one cannot determine with any certainty if chatters dis- guised their identities and demographics. Yet, it was obvious that indi- viduals varied from neophytes to experienced. The former can be iden- tified by a reluctance to participate in public chats or when they identify themselves as such. The latter are known to old hands and are greeted as such upon arrival. Additionally, judging by their nicknames and use of the feminine or masculine Hebrew verb form, males and females were fairly even distributed. Ethical Considerations It became evident that ethics needed to be addressed. Should the ISP, por- tals, or chatters be informed about the researcher’s identity or purpose? Are general chat room discussions public discourses? The Sudweeks and Rafaeli approach was followed (1996, p. 121; Paccagnella, 1997): “We view public discourse on . . . computer mediated communication as just that: public. Analysis of such content, where individuals’, institutions’, and lists’ identities are shielded, is not subject to ‘Human Subject’ restraints. Such study is more akin to the study of tombstone epitaphs, graffiti, or letters to the editor. Personal?—yes. Private?—no.” Thus, only public exchanges were analyzed as public discourse because they were not solicited. However, portals and participants’ nicknames are disguised throughout this article. ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS Three themes dominated chat-room interactions: chat rooms as com- munities, chatting as flow experiences, and chatting as image manage- ment. Because previous research has dealt with the first theme, it is only noted that the findings (details are available from the author) are in general agreement with recent articles on online communities (McAlexan- der et al., 2002; Muniz & O’Guinn, 2001), and the other two themes are discussed. A theoretical discussion of the relevant theme is followed by illustrative examples. CHAT ROOMS AS PROVIDERS OF FLOW EXPERIENCES Flow—A Theoretical Overview A theme that became apparent in the ethnography was chatting as a flow experience (Han, 1988; Massimini, Csikszentmihalyi, & Delle Fave, 1988). This section begins with a short overview of flow experiences. Then, it shows how chatting provides for such a flow (with one exception, discussed below). Importantly, online chatting does not always involve flow FLOW EXPERIENCES AND IMAGE MAKING 859
experiences. In some cases, chatters may seek pleasure, power, partici-
pation, or sexual on- or off-line encounters. The intent here is to suggest
that for some chatters, online chatting is a flow experience some of the
time, a point for which a reviewer is thanked.
Csikszentmihalyi (1988, p. 15) noted that psychological trends “all
share a common epistemology. In an attempt to be scientific as possible,
they have developed reductionistic accounts of human action, discount-
ing or ignoring the most obvious aspect of the human phenomenon,
namely, the existence of a conscious self.” He suggested that the self is
built on pleasure, power, and participation, used in various combinations
to shape consciousness. Since consciousness, emotions, and feeling have
evolved, pleasure, power, and participation do not adequately account
for some goals individuals pursue. Thus, it is necessary to develop a view
of the self that is teleonomic (a goal-oriented process by a person uncon-
scious of the goal) in nature. Csikszentmihalyi advanced the concept of
flow, what one feels when an event is beyond the normal course of life.
Such events produce “a sense of exhilaration, energy, and fulfillment that
is more enjoyable than what people feel in the normal course of life.”
Flow is more likely when individuals are motivated by themes beyond
pleasure, power, and participation (Csikszentmihalyi, 1988). Needing to
open their consciousness to live and experience new venues for being,
flow, which, once experienced motivates replications, provides people
with autotelic motivation (defined as something worth doing for its own
sake). The goal is the experience, not its external rewards. When people
engage in an activity with no premeditated practical goal they can make
new and important discoveries and “the flow experience is the prototype
of such intrinsically motivated states of consciousness” (Csikszentmi-
halyi, 1988, p. 29).
Flow’s structure is based on seeing an activity as autotelic. Csik-
szentmihalyi (1975) documented flow experiences for artists, athletes,
and dancers, who unanimously describe flow using similar terminology.
Such unanimity indicates that these specific experiential states, pro-
duced by reordering consciousness, are desirable and motivate people to
seek reexperience in any domain (Csikszentmihalyi, 1988). Flow requires
three characteristics, which account for the experience and future
attempts to relive it (Csikszentmihalyi, 1988; Han, 1988; Massimini et
al., 1988). First, a precondition for flow is that people perceive that there
is an act they are capable of. Stated differently, a balance is required
between the challenges posed and the skill brought to a flow activity.
Second, the experience must be an opportunity for personal growth. The
task must become increasingly challenging and the tools used to handle
it must become more complex over time. If skills exceed the challenge or
if the challenge exceeds the skills, flow will not occur. Whether skills and
challenge co-balance depends on the individual’s autotelic nature. Third,
flow materializes in structured activities (rituals, games, and sports),
860 SHOHAMwhich allow for variety and control of skills needed for and complexity of the experience (Csikszentmihalyi, 1988). Flow experiences have seven dimensions. First, the activities must have clear goals to enable an individual to know what needs to be done (Csikszentmihalyi, 1988). Second, flow requires rapid and clear feedback to allow individuals to know how well they perform. Third, the activity requires and results in focused concentration. Being enjoyable, such activities allow individuals to attend to them totally, producing an aware- ness/activity bond. Fourth, one needs to be able to perceive the experi- ence as being sufficiently under one’s control. This explains the insis- tence of risky sport practitioners that the sport is not risky, because the outcome is under their control. Fifth, flow can potentially distort time and make it subjective. The passage of time is unnoticed because the expe- rience is involving and enjoyable. Sixth, people should experience a tran- scendence of self. Skydivers describe their flow activity “as one of total absorption that provides them not only with thrill and excitement, but also a sense of involvement that transcends mundane experience” (Celsi, Rose, & Leigh, 1993, p. 11; Arnould & Price, 1993). This enables a strength- ening of the self over specific and repeated flow experiences. Finally, self- consciousness, how we appear to others, tends to disappear. Ethnography of Chat as Flow This ethnography phase illustrates how the first six dimensions of flow apply to chat rooms. Notably, the author is aware of potential differences between himself and other chatters. Although chatting with a social goal in mind, the author was also trying to understand chatting, so he made every effort to not project his experiences into others. Furthermore, chat- ters were phoned and e-mailed to ensure that the observations were not an idiosyncrasy of the author’s projections. They suggested that the description applies to them as well. Clear Goals. An obvious goal in chat rooms is meeting others. A less obvious but common one is searching for virtual cybersex or actual sex- ual encounters. The following two examples are typical. The first was recorded on 2/10/2002 and newcomers are noted as such. Lawrence [newcomer]: Hi. Ben [newcomer]: Hi everybody. I am looking for a married woman about 45 years old. Any takers? Maggie: Hi, Lawrence. Lawrence: Any horny ladies? I am looking to have some fun. Kent [newcomer, self-designated by nick as married and orthodox Jew]: Any orthodox lady? FLOW EXPERIENCES AND IMAGE MAKING 861
Lawrence: Looking for a lady that wants to reach new heights.
Ken: Kent, if I were you, I’ll look for ladies, who are not deeply religious.
Quick Feedback. The next exchange, from 2/9/2002, was an unsolicited
private conversation. It happened when the author mistyped his nick,
resulting in a nick that can be perceived as a bisexual person (shown as
[Bi] below). While illustrating clear goals, it shows how rapid feedback
can be provided in the virtual world. The exchange lasted only about 30 s.
It shows clarity of purpose for Noel, who was searching for a bisexual
partner for cybersex. He came, he saw, and he did not conquer, so he left
for greener pastures.
Noel [Self designated as a 29-year-old male, married person]: Hi.
Bi: Hi to you too.
Noel: How old?
Bi: 49. Why? Is it important?
Noel: Are you bi?
Bi: Depends on how you define bi . . .
Noel: I mean bi-sexual.
Bi: LOL. No, not really. And you?
Noel: I am bi-sexual. How do you define bi?
Bi: Bi can mean many different things (including your interpretation).
For example, someone, who enjoys talking to males and females. Talk!
Noel: I hear you.
Bi: I’ll allow you to keep on searching, then. Have a nice day and happy
hunting.
Noel: Thanks. Bye.
Bi: Bye.
Focused Concentration. On many occasions, people focus on an
exchange to the point of disregarding other on-screen exchanges. This is
typical when chatters are involved in private conversations. In such sit-
uations, the probability of not noticing that someone else is talking
directly to the person in a private exchange is high. For example, the fol-
lowing exchange between regulars took place on 1/21/2002:
Leo: Hey, Katie. How come you disregard me?
Katie: Leo, you should examine your eyes. I acknowledged your greetings
and responded.
862 SHOHAMLeo: What did you say? Katie: I said “Hi bro”. Leo: Oh, sorry, you are right. I apologize. I was talking to someone pri- vately. Katie: Jerryyyy. Jeryyyy. Jerry: Hi Katie. Sorry, Katie. I was not paying attention, diving, you know. Feeling of Control. The next requirement is that individuals feel that the situation is under their control. The two exchanges below, from 12/20/2001 and 11/12/2001, respectively, are characteristic of individuals making an effort to maintain control over their chat destiny. The first pro- vides two additional exemplars of control-seeking behavior. In all cases, the chat was among regulars. In the first encounter, Don works hard to maintain control of his chat-room environment, being worried about fit- ting in, age-wise. The second exchange provides two examples of Kay and Amy, two regulars, involved in control maintenance strategies. Dina: Hi everyone and you, Donna and Nate. Don [after a minute of no response]: D, since nobody is reacting—hi to you. Dina: Hi to you, too, Don. N: Good morning Dina. Donna: Hey, I am still up. Dina: Yea! They woke up (smiley face). Don: Well done, Nate, you managed to come out of the dive [smiley face]? Dina: Don, Donna has also awoken. Don: Dina, yes, I can see. How can one not see? Dina: Don, I thought you did not see. Some people don’t (smiley face). Don: Dina, at my age . . . we have glasses. Dina: Mmm (sad face . . . old? Don: I am at the age of this room [forty plus]. Still. Dina: Still and here go the years and suddenly, you are fifty. Don: Hey, I am still three months away from fifty. Will you still accept me here then? Dina: Of course, Don. I am accepted and I am not yet forty. . . . At worst, you can always switch to the “fifty plus” chat room. Don’t tell them your age (smiley face). FLOW EXPERIENCES AND IMAGE MAKING 863
Danny: Kay, How old are you?
Kay: Danny, what sign are you?
Danny: Kay, how can I answer you if you don’t answer me first? Kay, are
you from the sign “bullshit”?
Kay: Why do you answer me like this [a series of sad graphical faces]?
Danny: [A smiley]. Kay, why don’t you just answer my question?
*
Kay: Danny, I don’t answer such questions in the general chat area, only
privately.
Danny: So, you are ashamed about your age!
Kay: Not ashameddddd.
Danny: Yes, you are. Otherwise, why are you avoiding my question?
Kay: Why do you mind?
Danny: I don’t; I was just wondering. I am 32, by the way.
Kay: Sorry, only privately.
*
Amy: Aren’t you the hero, Danny?
Danny: A, concentrate on your private exchanges.
Amy: Concentrating, Danny.
Danny: So, why are you communicating in the general chat room?
A: I feel like it!
Enya: My, oh my. Aren’t you in a combative mood today, Danny?
Danny: Enya, are you sick today?
Amy: Who asked you, Danny, what to do here?
Enya: Danny, why do you think?
Danny: Enya, I am surprised. You have never approached me directly
before today. That’s why I thought something was wrong with you . . .
Enya: Do you like it, though?
Amy: Good, Danny. You are off my case.
A Distorted and Subjective Sense of Time. This fifth characteristic of
chatting as a flow experience is illustrated through three observations.
One, from 12/21/2001, shows a chat-room exchange in which Elsa [regu-
lar] failed to see Dan [regular] because she has been “diving.” Note how
time becomes distorted and subjective for Elsa when she chats online.
864 SHOHAMElsa: Dannn. Have not seen you in a long timeeee. Dan: Elsa, actually, I come in every day and spend hours in the room. Elsa: Is that so, Dan? Dan: Yes, Elsa. Could it be due to the fact that you “dive” so often and for so long [Two smiley faces]? Elsa: Indeed, Dan, you are right. It is just that when I “dive”, I see nobody and am completely unaware of time. It flies so quickly . . . The second observation (1/15/2002), unlike others, involves a count of the people in one room over 3 hours. At 8:45 PM, there were 51 people in the room. At 9:45, 27 of these people were still present and active. Twenty of the original chatters were still online and talking at 10:45. Finally, at 11:45, 23 of the originals were still chatting. When three of them were asked privately, they noted that this was typical and that they were addicted to chatting. Thus, they failed to recognize how long they have been online and one actually asked, “Has it been three hours already”. Thus, one’s sense of time is indeed distorted and subjective when chat- ting, as prescribed by this facet of flow experiences. Finally, another exchange documents the addictive nature of chatting. Three regulars were involved in this conversation on 2/20/2002. As will become obvious, people get addicted to chatting. When they cannot chat online, they make sure that someone with whom they are in face-to-face or phone contact will let their friends know that they want to but can- not chat. Moreover, it shows that even when missing, a regular chatter attempts to contribute to the discussion, if only to let people know that she cannot establish a connection. Ben: Gloria, hi. Gloria: Hiii, Bennn. Ben: Gloria How are you doing? Gloria: I am OK. I am doing slightly better than I did last time. Ben: Ana asked me to say hi to you. Gloria: Thanks. Give her my regards. Ben: Ana cannot establish a connection to the chat service. Gloria: Why? What is wrong? Ben: Her computer has a problem, but she asked me specifically to pass her regards to you. She wanted to make sure that you hear from her through me. Transcendence of the Self. The sixth component of a flow experience is its provision of opportunities for transcendence of the self, which blur the distinction between the self and important others, as they become an on- FLOW EXPERIENCES AND IMAGE MAKING 865
or off-line group. Specifically, loss of self-consciousness and a transcen-
dence of ego boundaries are apparent when one gets a sense of growth
and of being part of a greater entity (Csikszentmihalyi, 1993). The com-
plexity of interacting with many people in a chat room and off-line meet-
ings is far greater than normal, one-to-one interactions. This enhances
one’s involvement with the activity, which makes the chatter feel as one with
the group (Csikszentmihalyi, 1988). Chat rooms allow for personal growth,
especially when members move from a virtual to a nonvirtual space
(McAlexander et al., 2002; Muniz & O’Guinn, 2001). A third of the rela-
tionships started in Internet news groups develop into face-to-face meet-
ings (Parks & Floyd, 1996). The following announcement, posted in the
general room for all to see on entry, illustrates that many chatters want
to know fellow community members beyond the virtual environment.
You have entered the ZZZ room. After the great party of 280 in CLUB1,
prepare for the end of winter party. The Party will be held on 3/14, in the
charming CLUB2. Only 40 minutes from Tel Aviv. Come visit the party’s
site and you can have an impact on which music will be played. You can
reserve your tickets through Lea, or Sharon.
The party described is not atypical. Parties and meetings allow for
change (Celsi et al., 1993), development, and renewal of the self (Arnould
& Price, 1993). Chat-room regulars provide a similar role as that pro-
vided by rafting guides (Arnould & Price, 1993). It is the tangible element
of guidance that allows newcomers to acquire skills, thus enhancing the
fun aspect of chatting, as documented in earlier passages. Additionally,
chat rooms provide a context for personal change and for organizing a new
identity (identity construction; Celsi et al., 1993). Chat rooms allow a
person to mask personal characteristics in building a new identity (Wit-
mer & Kartzman, 1998), be it a constant (but different from the identity
used in other contexts) or a new identity every time a person chats.
Personal growth and identity construction sometimes require that a
person mask his or her true self, in line with chatting as a genre of play
or a costume ball (Danet, Ruedenberg, & Rosenbaum-Tamari, 1998).
Purim, the Jewish equivalent of Halloween, when people wear costumes,
was the context for the following exchange between regulars (2/25/2002).
Mordecai is in “costume,” with a nickname from the biblical story of
Purim, and Isaiah calls himself “a man in costume.” The dialogue exem-
plifies two issues. First, that chatters wear costumes. In this case, the con-
text allows it and the chat room provides an opportunity to construct a
new, “new” personal identity (Belk, 1988; Schouten, 1991). The second
“new” means a self that differs from one’s everyday chat identity, which
is also new for many people. Second, it shows the effort people make to
recognize other regulars. This parallels the need for the chat room con-
text to be well defined, as is the skydiving context (Celsi et al., 1993).
Isaiah: Gee, Mordecai, I do not like your style.
Mordecai: Isaiah, I told you . . . if you only knew who I am.
866 SHOHAMIsaiah: And you, Mordecai, know who I am? Mordecai: I think I do. Isaiah: I, for one, think I recognize you. Mordecai: And I think I know you as well. Kim [newcomer]: Hey, Isaiah, I also want to know who you are! Isaiah: Mordecai, if you know, do tell everyone. Mordecai: I know. Another way in which chat rooms make it possible to manage the self is by providing a supporting, group-like environment. The following examples (11/19/2001 and 10/10/2001) illustrate how chat rooms can play an important role in supporting chatters’ identity. Bob [regular]: Hi, Barbara [regular]. How are you doing? Barbara: Great. Bob: How come? Barbara: Bob, I have you to thank. You encouraged me yesterday and I finished the project. Ely [newcomer]: Congratulations, Barbara [graphical representations of birthday cakes]. Bonny [regular]: Barbara—great! [graphical representations of “thumbs up”]. Ely: I don’t know why I am congratulating you, Barbara, but congrat- ulations anyway. Barbara: Thanks, Ely. Moira [regular]: [Graphical cakes]…Congratulations, Barbara [Graph- ical kisses]. Barbara: Thanks, all. Couldn’t have done it without you. Sony: Hi, Sapphire. How are you? Sapphire: OK. Sony: How is Jerry [Sapphire’s partner]? Is he OK? Sapphire: He is still sick. Sony: Really? Ouch. Give him my best for a fast recovery. Sapphire: Yes, they seem to have found what is wrong with him. It’s [a medical description]. Sony: Sapphire, make him healthy again! Does he need an operation? Sapphire: They do not know yet. In a week, after additional tests, we’ll know more. FLOW EXPERIENCES AND IMAGE MAKING 867
Sony: Sapphire, give him my best and let me know if I can help in any
way.
Sapphire: Thanks. Will let you know.
The third example involves Ely [regular], who arrived in a bad mood
after a difficult day at work. The regulars felt for him and provided sup-
port. Prior to departing on 9/9/2001:
Ely: OK, everyone, I have to go. Behave as if you are all sad to see me
go. It will do wonders for my ego. Lie, if you must. [five seconds later].
Come onnnnn!
Lea [regular]: Ely, haven’t you left yet [smiley].
Betty [regular]: {{{{Ely}}}} don’t go! NO! Not yet! [graphical representa-
tion of a kiss].
Ely: Have a great day, all. Thanks!
Mira [regular]: Byeeee, Elyyy!
In sum, chat rooms provide a flow-enhancing context. Six components
of flow-like experiences are present. Loss of self-consciousness is miss-
ing and is discussed below.
CHATTING TO MANAGE AND ENHANCE AN IMAGE
Image Management and Enhancement—A Theoretical
Overview
A brief overview of the literature is provided first. Impression manage-
ment is defined as “the process by which individuals attempt to control
the impressions others form of them” (Leary & Kowalski, 1990, p. 34) or
as an “attempt to control images that are projected in real or imagined
social interactions” (Schlenker, 1980, p. 6). The terms image and impres-
sion management are used interchangeably in the literature and the for-
mer will be used here.
Three overlapping approaches have been used to explain why people
engage in image management. First, Goffman (1959) identified three
motives: defining one’s place in the social hierarchy, setting a tone for
social interactions, and facilitating the performance of behavior that is
governed by one’s roles. Second, Leary and Kowalski (1990, p. 37) sug-
gested three motives: “maximizing one’s reward–cost ratio in social rela-
tions, enhancing one’s self-esteem . . . and facilitating the development
of desired identities.” The three interrelated motives underlie five con-
crete benefits. The first two, at the most general level, are based on “the
motive to engage in impression management [that] springs from the
same motivational source as all behavior, namely, to maximize expected
rewards and minimize expected punishments.” Then, image manage-
868 SHOHAMment may be used purely to affect the audience’s behaviors. It may also be important in joining and aligning one’s public and ideal selves. Finally, people may engage in image management as a means of creating and sustaining identities. The third and final approach (Tedeschi & Riess, 1981) discusses two motives for impression management, defined as a behavior designed to control or manipulate the impressions formed by oth- ers. First, it is important to the extent that it improves symbolic inter- actions when individuals take on identities that are related to their roles. Self-presentation techniques allow actors in symbolic interactions to define the situation and their social identities and affect acceptable behavioral boundaries. Second, people seek to attain credit and avoid blame. Image is managed to maximize credit and minimize blame by allowing actors to associate themselves with positive interaction out- comes and disassociate themselves from negative ones. Actors achieve these outcomes by building power, immediate and delayed, which is based on their perceived expertise, trustworthiness, legitimacy, consistency, and physical appearance. Image Management and Enhancement—Ethnography Findings Image management has not been recognized as a central feature of com- puter-mediated-communications (CMC) in a chat-room context yet. Walther (1996) noted that CMC provides senders with an opportunity to construct messages to optimize self-presentation. The image manage- ment ethnography examples follow Bromley’s analysis of such strate- gies (1993). This analysis is structured and allows for developing obser- vations that, as a whole, tell a compelling story of chatting for image management and enhancement. Bromley’s first observation (1993, p. 101) is that people who have the most to gain or lose in way of reputation (e.g., celebrities and entertain- ers) will be “the most sensitive to and active in managing their reputa- tion.” In chat rooms, the people with most to gain and lose are “old reg- ulars” or newcomers in search of a position in the chat hierarchy. The following examples document image-management behavior by the two types of chatters. The first exchange (1/30/2002) involves Samantha [regular] and Clancy [newcomer]. Samantha is quick to defend her position and image as an accomplished individual, single, but not in search of a partner. Clancy is angling for a position in the hierarchy based on an image as an assertive individual, while signaling his search for a partner. While illustrating Bromley’s first theme, the exchange shares much in common with another theme. Following Deluga (1991), Bromley (1993) argued that people use numerous impression-management tactics, including assertiveness, power, and flattery. In this example, Clancy uses friendliness to approach Samantha, a high-powered, established chatter. Samantha, on the other hand, uses assertiveness and power to put him in place. FLOW EXPERIENCES AND IMAGE MAKING 869
Clancy: Samantha???
Samantha: What is it, Clancy?
Clancy: What’s your angle?
Samantha: Mine?
Clancy: I still cannot tell.
Samantha: What have I done, Clancy?
Clancy: What are you searching for?
Samantha: What do you want from me, Clancy?
Clancy: Nothing, really.
Samantha: So why do you think I am searching for anything?
Clancy: Are you not? How old are you?
Samantha: I am not searching for anything! I found everything I have
been looking for!!!
Clancy: Married?
Samantha: Not married! Anything else, Clancy?
The second example documents an exchange in the same room, imme-
diately following the previous discussion. In this case, Sammy tries (and
succeeds) to ingratiate himself, since Sally is a powerful member of the
room community. Sally uses the opportunity to build a coalition with
Sammy, which will further strengthen her position (Bromley, 1993).
Sammy [regular]: LOL. WOW, Sally, you sure seem to be irritated.
Sally [regular]: Sure, Sammy. Wouldn’t you be irritated? Such an attack!
Sammy: And, all you did was trying to be friendly to him.
Sally: I tried????? I was!!!
Sammy: Of course you were.
Sally: Sammy, you are OK.
Sammy: Thanks, Sally.
Sally: You are welcome, Sammy.
The third conversation (2/10/2002) involves Thomas [newcomer] and
Tania [regular]. Thomas has much to gain/lose through his self-portrayal.
He continuously tries to establish an image of good-looking, sexy indi-
vidual, as befitting his presumed goal to find a lady for a private chat.
Once his intentions became known, nobody reacts to his advances.
Thomas: Good morning. Any serious females here?
Tania [regular]: Good morning, Thomas.
870 SHOHAMThomas: I am 43, good looking and sexy. Really! * [Other chatters, experienced or not, continue the general discussion] Thomas: If anybody wants to talk to me, let’s talk “privately”. It will be worth her while! A third theme discussed by Bromley (1993, p. 101) is that individuals engage in image management to affect “how we are viewed generally by others, and how we are viewed by individual others” (DePaulo, Kenny, Hoover, Webb, & Oliver, 1987). This theme is illustrated through the choice of nicknames (nicks), following Bechar-Israeli’s analysis of nicks as identity markers (1995). According to her, individuals choose nicks with care because they can convey their identity and encourage other chatters to strike up a conversation with them (Curtis, 1997). In this section, her categorization of nicks is followed with examples from the cur- rent research for the six categories. Importantly, as noted by a reviewer, the analysis here is inferred or assumed from the nicks. The first category is nicks related to literature, fairy tales, films, and television, such as “Tinkerbell,” “Lolita,” “Beavis,” and “Zoro.” In such cases, people choose nicks to mesh with their self-image. Alternatively, such nicks are designed to create a mental image of chatters to others with whom they interact. The second category includes fauna or flora nicks. For example, chatters used “elm,” “tree,” “scorpion,” and “butterfly.” Sim- ilar to the goal of image portrayal in the first category, the first two nicks are designed to portray an image of strength and stability, the third of danger, and the fourth of lightness and sociability. A third category involves choosing nicks of famous people. Such a choice is a form of iden- tification or an effort to be perceived to be like the famous person (Bechar- Israeli, 1995). Examples include “Sharon” (Israel’s prime minister) and “Nimni” (a famous Israeli soccer player). The fourth category is nicks related to objects. The intent is to associ- ate oneself with some prestigious object. For example, “sapphire” and “diamond” are precious stones. Choosing them as nicks associates the chatter with the rarity and beauty of the precious stone. Two other pop- ular categories are related to people’s self/age. Examples include mari- tal status, such as “married39” (status/age), “happily married,” and “divorced-female” (status/gender); appearance, such as “fat,” “foxy,” “ugly- B,” and “sexy”; personality, such as “warm-Tel-Aviv” (with locale) and “redhead” (perhaps hinting at a redhead personality); and profession, such as “pilot,” “truck driver,” and “rich-contractor” (with income). These are designed to convey an image related to the facet of the self empha- sized by the nickname. Paradoxically, some nicks are negative, such as the “ugly-B” example above. Negative nicks play a part in what Tedeschi and Riess (1981, pp. 4-5) call “symbolic interaction,” in which self-hand- icapping nicks “can serve to disarm information suggesting one’s incom- petence.” FLOW EXPERIENCES AND IMAGE MAKING 871
Bromley’s fourth theme suggests that individuals may differ depend-
ing on the nature of the extant community. People may behave differ-
ently depending on whom they interact with or on the context of the
interaction. An illustration of such multinick and multibehavior chat is
when somebody else uses one’s regular nick purposefully or inadver-
tently. It is purposeful when a chatter knowingly uses someone else’s
nick—either playfully or to give the other a bad name. In a private con-
versation, a person explained the use of someone else’s nick because that
person mistreated him in an earlier chat. An inadvertent situation can
arise because once a nick is used, subsequent chatters cannot use it.
Thus, a person, whose nick is already in use needs to select a different
one. To maintain his or her image, the latter chatter tells the room that
he is using a different name so as to be recognized. Some feel very strongly
about the color of the font they use when chatting and will treat other’s
use of the same color as almost equal to the use of one’s regular nick. The
following exchange (9/1/2001) illustrates both situations. Note how force-
fully Sandi defends her “color” and how indignant Connie is because
another person uses her regular nick. People work hard at managing
and enhancing their image and can become verbal and unhappy when
they feel this image is infringed upon.
Sandi [regular]: There are thieves here today. They stole my color.
Connie [regular]: Sandi, who stole your color?
Sandi: You, Connie, first, and then Isaac [regular].
Isaac: I stole your color?
Connie: [smiley faces].
Sandi: Yes.
Connie: Someone stole my nick. This is much worse.
Sandi: But the other Connie is a male.
Connie: So. He is an 18 years old SOB.
Along the same line, a Purim holiday gave chatters an opportunity to
use different nicks so that they can “wear” a different personality. How-
ever, even when masked, regulars tend to make an effort to give away
their true chat identity. This attests to the powerful nature of the com-
munity and the importance of belonging to it, as in the following
(2/25/2002).
Masked Man [regular]: Hi, Fiona [regular]. What exactly are you doing
here?
Fiona: Masked Man, if you knew who I really am, you would talk to me
differently.
Masked Man: And, do you, Fiona, know who I am usually?
872 SHOHAMLeona [F; regular]: Fiona, I think he knows. Fiona: Yes, I think I know who you are. Masked Man: I, for one, know who you are usually. Fiona: And I know who you are, Masked Man. Masked Man: Go ahead and tell us. Fiona: I know. You are Joe most of the time. Masked Man: LOL. Fiona: LOL. Now, let’s see if you know my true identity. Masked Man: LOL. People are involved in image management to create or maintain a given self-image. Management processes are even more important when public images account for the norms, preferences, and expectations of the target audience, which are two additional themes emphasized by Bromley (1993). The first example is of Lana [regular], who worked hard to maintain her public image as a social and friendly chatter (1/17/2002). The second (11/25/2001) introduces Igor [regular], well known among regulars as a funny person. Lana: I have many friends here, Mat [newcomer]. Mat: Lana, who exactly? Can you be specific? Lana: Mat! Mat: Yes? Lana: Everybody here is a friend of mine. And I am mighty proud of it! Mat: I hear you, but please tell me specifically. Lana: Mat, whoever you are, you don’t understand me! Mat: I am listening . . . Lana: Each and every person in the room right now is my friend. Room, come on! Tell him! Lisa [regular]: Mat, we are all her friends. Ed [regular]: Indeed we are. Igor: Hi everyone. Want to hear a good joke? Hanna [regular]: Sure. Igor: [Tells a joke]. LOL. A good one! Hanna: LOL. LOL. Indeed. Donna [regular]: LOL, a very good one. FLOW EXPERIENCES AND IMAGE MAKING 873
Another image-management technique for newcomers is to associate
themselves with high social-totem-pole regulars. In the following
(3/2/2002), Simone is the newcomer.
Simone: Hi, everyone.
Ken: Room, meet Simone. Cynthia [F], please meet Simone. She is of our
mind. She is a “10”.
Cynthia: Ken, really?
Cynthia: Welcome, Simone.
Ken: Yes, she is quite a gal.
Simone: Thanks, Ken.
One of the relevant image management behaviors in a chat context is
defensive—when someone threatens a chatter’s identity or image or
when a person purposefully creates a negative image to reduce expec-
tations (Bromley, 1993), which is similar to a negative nick discussed
earlier. The following example from 9/1/01 illustrates this situation.
Ben [newcomer]: You must be very smart, Adam [newcomer].
Adam: I am not smart, brother. Most people will consider me stupid.
Ben: Why do you think so?
Adam: I am slow, but I think fairly fast.
Ben: Good for you, Adam.
Sheila [M; regular]: One way or another, welcome, Adam.
Another useful tactic is to ask the people in the room for help when
one’s image is threatened. Such a call is also designed to enhance one’s
social standing in the room (Bromley, 1993). The following is a typical
example (1/15/2002).
Kathy [regular]: I need a breather. Here is the way I usually do it [four
graphical faces that can be perceived as bewildered, shouting, or relax-
ing].
Ivan [regular]: Why are you shouting, Kathy?
Kathy: Who is shouting?
Marty [regular]: Kathy! You are frightening us.
Kathy: Shouting? Me? God forbid. Gentle is my middle name.
Ivan: Kathy, the faces you exhibited are of a person shouting.
Kathy: No, sweetheart, it’s me taking a deep breath. Someone, please
come to my defense! Room, help!
Ivan: Kathy is great!
Sheila [regular]: Rom, Kathy is gentle!
874 SHOHAMKathy: Thanks, I and Sheila.
Finally, the following exchange (3/4/2002) illustrates three attempts by
Homer (regular) to manage his image through defensive, self-promotion,
and general support tactics. It was recorded minutes after Moses [new-
comer] cursed Tom [regular] and left the room.
Tom: How are you doing, Homer?
Homer: Fine. How did you resolve the situation with Moses?
Tom: No resolution. He kept on cursing me.
Homer: Don’t go down to his level. Ignore him and enjoy the chat.
Tom: Didn’t you see? I ignored him completely.
Homer: Great! That’s the way to treat such people.
Nancy [newcomer]: Good evening to you, Homer.
*
Tom: Good evening Nancy.
Homer: Tom, Nancy belongs to my harem.
Nancy: A very good evening to you too, Tom.
Tom: How are you doing, Nancy? Homer, did you see? Nancy disappeared
from the room.
Homer: LOL. Nancyyy!
Tom: Let go, she is out of the room.
Homer: She just left us.
Tom: We are not of her caliber.
Homer: Tom, you are mistaken. She is a great lady. She must have lost
her connection to the room.
Tom: If you say so, Homer. Your word is good enough for me.
*
Johanna [regular]: Hi!
*
Homer: Hi, Johanna, sweetheart.
Johanna: Hi, Homer!
*
Tom: How are you, Johanna?
Johanna: Homer, what’s wrong?
Homer: Johanna, I am looking for new volunteers for my harem.
FLOW EXPERIENCES AND IMAGE MAKING 875Tom: Homer, don’t you have enough already?
Johanna: Why, Homer? Where have the old ones gone?
Homer: Y, people kept on interfering. They have all left without a warning.
*
In sum, many of the themes and motives of image management and
enhancement as outlined by Bromley (1993) operate in the chat-room
environment. People are aware of their public image and actively seek
to sustain and improve it in the chat room of their choice.
It is recognized here that a thin line separates image management
from deception, an issue for future research, especially in the context of
detecting deception. For example, it is almost impossible for individuals
to monitor all channels of communications, especially nonverbal ones
(DePaulo, 1992; DePaulo, Stone, & Lassiter, 1985). Even oft-lying and
practiced deceivers (personally or professionally), frequently reveal their
deceptions through nonverbal cues (Baron & Byrne, 1997), such as
microexpressions (fleeting facial expressions), discrepancies across non-
verbal cues, pitch/pace speech changes, sentence repair, eye-contact avoid-
ance, and exaggerated facial expressions (Ekman, 1985; Kleinke, 1986;
Stiff et al., 1989; Zuckerman, De Paulo, & Rosenthal, 1981). Such cues do
not exist in online communities, except for sentence repair. Future
research is needed on online deception cues. Lately, dating Web sites
have proliferated (e.g., www.udate.com). People’s portrayals in the per-
sonal ads show that most rate themselves as 5 out of 5 on their looks.
Although some obviously look the grade, most do not. Thus, an additional
venue for future research in the context of image management and decep-
tion on the Internet will involve online dating services.
IMPLICATIONS
This ethnography documented chatting as a flow experience and a way
to manage image. In this section, a number of examples are provided to
illustrate the practical importance of chat rooms, not gone unnoticed by
practitioners.
The first implication applies to managers of ISPs and to portal design-
ers, who should recognize the popularity of chat rooms and act accord-
ingly. Those that have no chat options should consider introducing them.
Those that have chat rooms should improve them. For example, improved
graphical icons can enhance the personalization of online dialogues. Addi-
tionally, stronger servers are needed to avoid system breakdowns due to
heavy use.
Marketing uses of brand communities are obvious and important
(McAlexander et al., 2002; Muniz & O’Guinn, 2001). Yet marketers can
use chat rooms differently. The following are three real-world examples
of opportunities. In all three cases, age-based chat rooms were used to
876 SHOHAMlaunch new products/services. The products were relevant for the target
age group or to experienced Internet users. The first (1/12/2001) illustrates
an introduction of a new service (city information) on a leading Israeli
portal. The introduction was made with no prior warning and disturbed
the normal exchange in the room.
Ian [regular]: My connection to the chat room was cut off.
Pam [newcomer]: Who cut you off?
Ian: And the server was impossible. I made every effort to re-establish
my connection. Pam, it must be a bug in the software of the chat server.
Jerry: http://xxxx.yyyyy.co.il/zzzz/wwwww.html
Pam: I [two graphical hearts].
Ian: My screen just went blank. Pam - [five hearts].
Isaac [newcomer]: Jerry, what is this address?
Jerry: It is a new city information service. Check it!
The second example from 1/30/2001 illustrates a new service—a party
in one of Tel Aviv’s nightclubs. Norman is the newcomer in this conver-
sation. Here, too, it takes the room a few seconds to recognize the inter-
ruption to the thread of the chat.
Norman: Thursday, there will be a couples’ party in Tel Aviv.
*
Norman: Want to know where?
*
Tami [F; regular]: Where, NA?
Norman: In “xxxxxxx”.
*
*
Norman: In Tel Aviv, at 2:30. A.M., of course.
Tami: What do people do in such parties?
Norman: It will be a blast. Loads of sex. Resolutions of the craziest fan-
tasies. What are your fantasies?
Ned: Norman, where will it be?
Norman: In “xxxxxxx”.
The third example (12/5/2000) is an introduction of a new Israeli por-
tal. It shows the risks and benefits of introducing a product into a chat
room. On one hand, at least one person tried the new portal. On the
other, he provided others with a very negative word-of-mouth.
FLOW EXPERIENCES AND IMAGE MAKING 877Hanna: [newcomer]: www.****.co.il.
Hanna: www.****.co.il.
Hanna: www.****.co.il [all in a span of 30 seconds].
Joe [regular]: Hanna, don’t you think you are a bit of a “nudnik”?
Joe: Everyone, this site is full of shit.
Joe: Room, I have checked it and it’s no good.
The next example (from 11/23/2000) met with a more positive reception.
Sam [newcomer]: Hi everyone.
Nathan [regular]: Hi to you too.
Sam: I came here to invite you all to a new line of parties being launched
tonight. Anyone here, who likes electronic music?
Gerry [regular]: Speak up, Sam.
Sam: So, here goes. Alternative music such as breakbit, bigbit, techno,
and chemical. Additionally, there will be video and multimedia artists.
Gerry: That’s not really alternative music.
Sam: Gerry, I will not challenge you on this J. Regardless, these types of
music will be played. This was the “what”. Now, to the “where”. XXX
club, in Y ZZZ St between Club W and Club V. A great location, somewhat
similar to Club U. So, what do you say, G?
Gerry: I say thanks for the invitation.
Sam: Good luck. Enjoy. Gerry, are you saying thanks out of politeness or
are you seriously interested as in “WHEN IS IT?” J.
Gerry: Half interested.
Sam: Tonight at midnight. Doors open at 11:30 P.M.
Gerry: You said today?
Sam: Indeed. We’ll start every Thursday and expand if there is suffi-
cient interest. I hope you all come and you Gerry, specifically. Even if
not, have a good one!
A final example, recorded on the evening of 3/24/2002, may well allow
a glimpse into the future. Could it be that professionals, psychologists in
this case, will practice in chat rooms, as this example suggests at least
one maybe does (a reviewer noted that this may not be a professional as
there is no way to gauge from the chat if she is)?
Psychologist: Hi. Do you have a problem?
George: Not really, just curious to chat.
Psychologist: I am just counsel here. How old are you?
George: 31.
878 SHOHAMPsychologist: What do you do in life?
George: I am a marketing manager. Are you part of the services pro-
vided by the ISP?
Psychologist: Not really. I have some free time and I am ready to coun-
sel, that’s all.
George: So you counsel in chat rooms to provide a social benefit?
Psychologist: Right. Especially given the hard time in Israel now.
George: Are you qualified?
Psychologist: Of course. I am a clinical psychologist.
*
*
Psychologist: I just want to help, that’s all. Many people find it easier on
the net. They are less shy. I cannot help everyone, but I can help some.
And I refer the others to professional treatment. And explain what it
will involve.
George: Are you bugged a lot?
Psychologist: Sometimes. However, most of those who talk with me have
real problems and I can tell imposters through experience.
SUMMARY
This ethnography identified three themes of chat rooms. The first is
chat rooms as communities. As such, chat rooms are virtual communi-
ties, being manifestations of rooms, rings, and lists (Solomon, 2002). A
community is the third level of the extended self (after the individual
and family levels, and before the group level; Belk, 1988). This level is
common to individuals, who describe themselves as members of a given
community (chat room). Probably due to some level of rejection of the
dominant culture, people can take four paths when they feel out of sync
with their culture (Berkman, Lindquist, & Sirgy, 1996). The third,
search for community, is the one relevant to the chat-room context. The
second theme is chatting as a flow experience. Novak, Hoffman, and
Yung (2000) noted that people have fun on the Web when in a state of
flow due to their levels of skill, control, attention and arousal, and inter-
activity. Flow is likely to be experienced when happiness is high, such
as when people are proactive and engaged, rather than passive (Ryan
& Deci, 2000). This, indeed, is the case in chat-room environments.
Finally, image is actively managed in chat rooms. Thus, chat rooms can
be viewed as theatres, in which chatters are social performers (Goffman,
1959). In other words, chat rooms are reflections of a dramaturgical
perspective.
FLOW EXPERIENCES AND IMAGE MAKING 879You can also read
